United States v. Jose

• Decision Date: 12 October 1894
• Docket Number: 257.
• Citation: 63 F. 951
• Court: United States Circuit Court, District of Washington, Northern Division
• Parties: UNITED STATES v. JOSE.

63 F. 951

UNITED STATES v. JOSE.

No. 257.

United States Circuit Court, D. Washington, Northern Division.

October 12, 1894

Wm. H Brinker, U.S. Atty.

Greene & Turner, for defendant.

Carr &amp Preston, for receivers, Seattle, L.S. & E. Ry. Co.

HANFORD District Judge.

At the instance of the receivers of this court, in charge of the business and property of the Seattle, Lake Shore & Eastern Railway Company, the defendant has been arrested and brought before the court to answer a charge of contempt alleged to have been committed by him, in this: That on or about the 14th day of August, last, said defendant unlawfully willfully, and clandestinely wrested from the possession of said receivers, and removed out of the jurisdiction of this court, a raft of saw logs which was theretofore in the lawful possession of said receivers. The undisputed facts are that the defendant, prior to the date of the alleged offense, was engaged in cutting saw logs at a place near to the line of said railroad, and dependent on said railroad for transportation of his saw logs to salt water. The logs were delivered to the receivers, and carried upon trucks to Salmon bay, where they were unloaded, and placed in a boom owned and controlled by one A. C. Pates. Timber belonging to other loggers, transported by the same railroad, was also received and cared for by said Pates, who, for a consideration paid by the loggers, attended to the unloading of the logs from the trucks, and placed them in a general boom, and afterwards, as required, sorted them, and made up rafts for towing; having pocket booms, rafting gaps, and other necessary conveniences for the business. The defendant was unable to prepay the railroad charges for transportation and it was customary for him to make payments on account after making sale of each raft. In April or May preceding the alleged offense, at the request of the receivers, through the auditor and general traffic manager of the railroad, the defendant, by the firm name of Thomas Jose & Son, in which he was then transacting his logging business, signed a written contract, whereby he consented that the receivers might do the work of unloading the logs from their trucks, and that said logs should be deemed to be in the possession of the receivers so long as the same remained in said boom; the expense of unloading and booming to be borne in the first instance by the receivers, and added to their charges for freight; such expense to be not greater than had been previously charged for the same service. That part of the written contract relating to the payment by the receivers of charges for unloading and booming has not been observed, the fact being that said Pates continued after the making of said contract do to the work, and look to the defendant for payment, as he had previously done. After said contract had been signed, and at least two months before the date of the alleged offense, the receivers, through their employes, entered into a verbal agreement with said Pates, whereby he undertook to receive the logs of the defendant in his boom, and hold the same as agent for the receivers, and promised that he would not permit any of said logs to be taken away without giving notice to the receivers, and obtaining their consent previous to the removal; and in fulfillment of his said agreement said Pates did notify the receivers, and obtain instructions from them releasing each raft taken by the defendant, until the taking complained of in this case. On the afternoon of August 14, 1894, the defendant, without the knowledge or consent...